*GOOFYRAT!*
Gonna be gone a while. I'll be back!
Why...are we arguing about space rocks?
(Satire Joke, for the dumbasses who can't tell.)
(Satire Joke, for the dumbasses who can't tell.)
Add-on Ratings changes
- Thread starter RoyKirbs
- Start date
Its because these space rocks are more useful then c, o and l combined
Sls64LGamingBro
An ordinary coder...
Adding in a 100-word maximum is mostly useful. I like typing a paragraph with at least a minimum of letters. Grammar is even more important when it comes to writing and typing. Even if the reviews were removed, I would probably comment on their discussion tab about their addon.
Wumbo
edited
I was going to bow out of this discussion, but I really don't like the assertion that those who are most upset about this change are clout chasers. This community definitely has a clout chasing problem (a discussion for another day), but the only people in this thread who I might consider part of/aligned with that culture are on the defensive side. Meanwhile I notice that many of the modders here opposing the star removal either haven't been active in the scene for too long and/or don't have a significant social standing. Which brings into question who this decision is really harming at the end of the day.
But in any case, it should be obvious that this issue is a little more nuanced than "people who want stars back just want to get away with being elitist assholes."
I didn't say that everyone who disagrees with this change is an elitist. Both sentiments I criticised were nonetheless expressed multiple times in this thread, and I don't want people to think those are healthy attitudes to have.
Post automatically merged:
Assuming people who don't like or need star ratings as feedback can't take criticism is awful presumptuous, mate.
Is it really?
I have personally never met anyone that can't take getting 1 star ratings well but still accepts written criticism, I feel like this is something that goes hand in hand with one another.
If people like this do exist on the forum, then they are probably in the minority in the grand scheme of things. Wouldn't make much sense to make a change purely to benifit people that might not even exist
*GOOFYRAT!*
Gonna be gone a while. I'll be back!
Ya'll.
It's probably time to move on.
It's probably time to move on.
Hm, this could be true. Judging by the responses of the site admins, I do not think they are going to revert this change no matter how many people argue against it.
Its a shame, but it is their site anyways. I guess you can just use the
at the top of a review to mimic this in a way but it will never truly be the same I suppose.
Last edited:
candelavla
OLDC X/10 reviews were axed for the same reason, replaced with ranked voting back when the OLDC was still a contest. X/Y scores are way too arbitrary.
I think the change is good in spirit, too bad it's half-baked so now we have secret invisible stars. Xenforo being a pain as usual.
I think the change is good in spirit, too bad it's half-baked so now we have secret invisible stars. Xenforo being a pain as usual.
PlatterTheFinch
"That being said..."
And what constitutes as bullying? That's up for the moderators to decide!
And when you have a small group of people deciding exactly what people can and can't say, that's called censorship!
Make sure to think the way they do and act the way they do, or OOPS-- you're banned!
Sls64LGamingBro
An ordinary coder...
People have a choice whether they won't or will, we make decisions no matter what we do. And if the staff won't agree with our opinions, we can debate and discuss it on this thread.
Whoexer9
Double Gear Specialist
...
Can you chill, I don't know why you'd talk about a mod like that. They don't force people to mimic their way of thinking, they stop people from treating other members of the community with disrespect--such as making them feel bad about themselves for being "incompetent". If you're not going to show respect maybe you shouldn't be part of this community.
This might be a hard concept to grasp at first but not every internet space is a democracy where your right to free speech is guaranteed.
Of course, that applies for the community for the game we make, on the forums we run and pay for. Even if we staff were as Orwellian as you're implying, we would be well within our right to do so, and you'd have to agree that we have a pretty good reason: if we prioritized pricks who care about nothing but their right to put creators down if so they choose just because it would be censorship otherwise, there would be no community left.
So yeah, screaming censorship is not the end-all be-all argument you think it is.
*GOOFYRAT!*
Gonna be gone a while. I'll be back!
Nice one.
Post automatically merged:
Okay, so a little something, as I respect how both of you have at least a somewhat useful way of taking the problem on.
Hey Xavier, I think Platter is being hypothetical. (If not, then wtf, Platter. That's just fucking asshat talk.)
I just wanna clarify that their answer wouldn't apply here, because the staff in this place are pretty laid back and cool (Especially Pikaspoop, thanks man.), but I've been in a community or two where the moderators weren't very great, so their answer would apply there.
Post automatically merged:
Plus, this guy is good proof that this change is beneficial.
Last edited:
I don't understand where you got this notion from. Nobody that argued for not removing the star ratings purely did it to "put the creator down" or being negative just for the fun of it, The only person that came close is "PlatterTheFlinch" and that's honestly a bit of a stretch in of itself.
We don't want to keep the star system to boost some ego of ours, or make fun of other people. We want to easily express our critic via visual representation so then the creator can follow through easier. Star ratings just make things easier for everyone, and paired with a 100 word minimum, It can be even better. Almost always ensuring that the 1 or 2 star reviews the creator reads are going to be insightful and helpful. Its objectively a easy to use system that's worked for a very long time *on most sites, and subjectively better then glorified likes.
But like I said before, Arguing over this a bit pointless regardless. You could probably pull more and more examples on why the star ratings are actually good, But I do not think it would matter much. At the end of the day, its the admins choice if they want it back or not and the clear answer is that they don't. No amount of arguing can ever change that in my eyes.
Last edited:
That is probably because the merit of the star ratings is no longer the topic of the post I quoted. It is Platter that began to talk about how changes to prevent bullying towards creators is tantamount to censorship and what I did was to simply say that, even if it was, that's not a good argument.
Uh, how exactly is that a bad argument?
There has already been discourse on what ratings mean to people, and instead of the correct meaning that is “basic criticism via visual representation”
We have people that think it makes the author “very upset and discourged” and the person leaving the rating itself a “egotistical maniac”.
In reality, these are very much the expection, not the rule. My argument in that post sees to point this out, so I do not understand whats “bad” about it.
*GOOFYRAT!*
Gonna be gone a while. I'll be back!
He never said it was bad.
His posted implied that if the topic he was referining to was still about star ratings, the argument I made wouldn't be a good one for it